Sonny Liston vs Jack Dempsey

No I don't. I'm all for contemporary sources, just like in the Dempsey-Flynn fight in which it seems, you have ignored all the newspaper reports of the fight and have second-guess because the promoter was a bit dodgy (aren't they all?), what was said by Dempsey's wife (you probably thought Marion Jones was innocent because her husband said she didn't take drugs) and what was written a decade later when Jack had made his legend and revisionists were saying "This couldn't have happened, no way- not to an American hero'. Well, it seems far more likely it did. :good

 

Well, I haven't got it on me now, I'm not at home. But I'm sure I have the material. :good



I wonder if I'll find it before you find your 'middleweight KO'd Witherspoon' source?

 

No I have actualy looked at all the sources and concluded that they do not lead to any definite conclusion either way. That is what a historian would do.

You for contrast have taken the position that most supports your agenda.

Now if you are saying that the fight was on the level that efectivley means that if you ran a bookmakers taking bets on the fight you would vouch for it.

 

The newspaper reports of the day are what I believe most. It's the books that are written years later that have an 'agenda'. So, it seems it is ME and not YOU that takes more notice of contemporary sources. :good

 

I'll trust MDWC anyday actually.


Speaking of credibility, did you ever come good with the Witherspoon was ko'ed by a middleweight in sparring story?

 

Oh come on

 

...and generally when there is no conclusion we have to rely on what actually happened. :good

 

Then you are verry misguided.

I could show you two newspaper acounts of the same fight that would give you a verry diferent impresion as to what happened.

 

Liston, by early stoppage. Sometime around the 3rd. :good

 

The point is we dont know what actualy happened.

there is a significant body of evidence both ways.

 

Thanks mate, I appreciate that. :good



ps. The main Daniel article I'm referring to, is from Ring magazine, early 1962. It had Jack on the cover and also a headline 'I wuz robbed' by Emile Griffith (if memory serves me well). It's a re-evaluation of the 'sacred cow' that was Dempsey. I bet it took about a decade for Fleischer to agree to feature it though.

 

But what happened is: KO 1. So, unless it's proved otherwise, then that's what counts.

 

By that logic Sonny Liston has a first round knockout loss to Casius Clay close to his prime. That is an even bigger question mark against his chin.

in that case you would have to re evaluate both Listons chin and clays power.

 

No.

What hapened was a first round stoppage with a significant amount of circumstantial evidence that it was not on the level.

So as a historian you would have to conclude you dont know.

If you are saying that the fight was on the level that efectivley means that if you ran a bookmakers taking bets on the fight you would vouch for it.

 

Anytime. Even better news is that i just studied up on a few old Heavyweight stories, and well, Daniel isn't the only old timer to make comment. Ever collect Boxing Scene? February 1985, the special Heavyweight edition. Of course if you don't have it i will have to get busy with a bit of typing per the other side of the coin for us.